PGDip ICT in HE 2017
Course Outline, Assessments and Rubrics
Workshops to be held at CPUT (Bellville):
Seminar room 1, 1st floor CPUT library building, Bellville campus. (14-16 Aug; 30-31 Oct)
Course platforms:
-
GDrive - Map photos, resources
-
Blog - Course site that draws everything together (also for final written Assignment)
-
Ted-Ed - Pre-Course and Webinar resources (x5)
-
Blackboard Collaborate - Webinar
GDrive - Map photos, resources
Blog - Course site that draws everything together (also for final written Assignment)
Ted-Ed - Pre-Course and Webinar resources (x5)
Blackboard Collaborate - Webinar
Course Outline
Pre-course Assignment
From 21 July-13 Aug
WS1-Day 1 - 14 Aug
(Welcome to the Sandpit - the sand)
08:30 Arrive and setup
09:00 Session 1: Rationale (Why?)
10:00 Session 2: What is Blended Teaching and Learning?
10:30 Tea
10:45 Session 2 continue
11:15 Session 3: ETILAB Teaching Change Frame
12:45 Session 4: Affordances
13:00 Lunch
13:45-16:00 Session 5: World Café: Teacher-Led themes
WS1-Day 2 - 15 Aug
(Sandpit -the tools)
08:30 Arrive
09:00 Day 1 Recap
09:30 Session 1: World cafe II: Student-Led themes
11:00 Tea
11:30 Session 2: World café III: e-Assessment themes
13:00 Lunch
13:45-16:00 Session 3: 7Cs Design Process
WS1-Day 3 -16 Aug
(Sandpit - building “castles)
08:30 Arrive
09:00 Recap Day 2
09:30 Continue with 7Cs Design Process
13:00 Lunch
14:00 Preparation for time online
- Introduce time online
- Selection of themes
- Planning in Teams with facilitator
- Final Assignment Discussed with facilitator
- All tools to be used learned (Ted-Ed, Collaborate, Blog, Screencasting)
15:45 Feedback on Day 1-3
Time Online
10 Weeks (5 Bi-weekly sessions with participants facilitating in groups of 2)
Theme 1 (Week 3-4) - 4-17 Sep: Blended Pedagogies (Gr 1)
Theme 2 (Week 5-6): 18 Sep-1 Oct: OER-OEP (Gr 3)
Theme 3 (Week 7-8): 2-15 Oct: Online Assessment (Gr4)
Theme 4 (Week 9-10): 16-29 Oct: Academic Online Identity (Gr 2)
Group 1: Vivienne
Group 2: JP
Group 3: Daniela
Group 4: Sonja
Webinar: Friday 12:45-13:30
WS2-Day 1 30 Oct
08:30 Arrive
09:00 Welcome back - Reflections
09:15 In Kahoot(s) (in Groups) - Questions that interrogate the knowledge gained so far
Session 1:
- Reflecting back on the 5 themes
- Back to Design (7Cs)
- Consolidating and integrating
Session 2: Digital Scholars
13:00 Lunch
14:00 Interview videos recorded
16:00 Break
WS2-Day 2: 31 Oct
08:30 Arrive
09:00 Recap day 1
09:30 Session 1:
-
Screen the videos
-
Assess and feedback with rubric
Session 2:
-
Post Course Survey results
Session 3: Course/ Programme close
- My PGDip Journey
- Finalising the Course and final assignment
- Final Feedback on WS2
Final Assignment
Finalise and submit final assignment: Academic piece (3000 word online/ papers/ article) as possible part of a resource for other academics.
Pre-course Assignment
From 21 July-13 Aug
| |
WS1-Day 1 - 14 Aug
(Welcome to the Sandpit - the sand)
|
08:30 Arrive and setup
09:00 Session 1: Rationale (Why?)
10:00 Session 2: What is Blended Teaching and Learning?
10:30 Tea
10:45 Session 2 continue
11:15 Session 3: ETILAB Teaching Change Frame
12:45 Session 4: Affordances
13:00 Lunch
13:45-16:00 Session 5: World Café: Teacher-Led themes
|
WS1-Day 2 - 15 Aug
(Sandpit -the tools)
|
08:30 Arrive
09:00 Day 1 Recap
09:30 Session 1: World cafe II: Student-Led themes
11:00 Tea
11:30 Session 2: World café III: e-Assessment themes
13:00 Lunch
13:45-16:00 Session 3: 7Cs Design Process
|
WS1-Day 3 -16 Aug
(Sandpit - building “castles)
|
08:30 Arrive
09:00 Recap Day 2
09:30 Continue with 7Cs Design Process
13:00 Lunch
14:00 Preparation for time online
- Introduce time online
- Selection of themes
- Planning in Teams with facilitator
- Final Assignment Discussed with facilitator
- All tools to be used learned (Ted-Ed, Collaborate, Blog, Screencasting)
15:45 Feedback on Day 1-3
|
Time Online
10 Weeks (5 Bi-weekly sessions with participants facilitating in groups of 2)
|
Theme 1 (Week 3-4) - 4-17 Sep: Blended Pedagogies (Gr 1)
Theme 2 (Week 5-6): 18 Sep-1 Oct: OER-OEP (Gr 3)
Theme 3 (Week 7-8): 2-15 Oct: Online Assessment (Gr4)
Theme 4 (Week 9-10): 16-29 Oct: Academic Online Identity (Gr 2)
Group 1: Vivienne
Group 2: JP
Group 3: Daniela
Group 4: Sonja
Webinar: Friday 12:45-13:30
|
WS2-Day 1 30 Oct
|
08:30 Arrive
09:00 Welcome back - Reflections
09:15 In Kahoot(s) (in Groups) - Questions that interrogate the knowledge gained so far
Session 1:
- Reflecting back on the 5 themes
- Back to Design (7Cs)
- Consolidating and integrating
Session 2: Digital Scholars
13:00 Lunch
14:00 Interview videos recorded
16:00 Break
|
WS2-Day 2: 31 Oct
|
08:30 Arrive
09:00 Recap day 1
09:30 Session 1:
Session 2:
Session 3: Course/ Programme close
- My PGDip Journey
- Finalising the Course and final assignment
- Final Feedback on WS2
|
Final Assignment
|
Finalise and submit final assignment: Academic piece (3000 word online/ papers/ article) as possible part of a resource for other academics.
|
Assessments and rubrics
1. Pre-Course Tasks - 10%
This activity will count 10% towards your final grade for the module. The activity has two parts. In essence, you have to watch a video (with guided questions and discussion), and do an online capabilities survey and submit your reaction/ results (in the form of a drawn map and a results diagram) on provided Google Drive spaces. The activity is to be found on TedEd. Please click on the following link to see and do the activity: https://ed.ted.com/on/StfLnWim
PS:Watch a short welcoming and orientation video regarding this first activity on TedEd. Feel free to watch this video first before clicking on the link above. This orientation video is available on YouTube at web address: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djlOwc0dqrs
Not completed
Partially completed/ Completed
Score
TedEd lesson -
No evidence of engagement in TedEd lesson (0)
Did watch and did respond to some (1) or all (2) of the questions
/2
Mapping exercise
No map created
Map created and uploaded to Google Drive folder
/4
DC Profile
No DC profile created
DC Profile created and shared (URL on TedEd and uploaded to Google Drive Folder)
/4
Total
/10
Not completed
|
Partially completed/ Completed
|
Score
| |
TedEd lesson -
|
No evidence of engagement in TedEd lesson (0)
|
Did watch and did respond to some (1) or all (2) of the questions
|
/2
|
Mapping exercise
|
No map created
|
Map created and uploaded to Google Drive folder
|
/4
|
DC Profile
|
No DC profile created
|
DC Profile created and shared (URL on TedEd and uploaded to Google Drive Folder)
|
/4
|
Total
|
/10
|
2. Online resource and webinar - 40%
In groups of two (supported by a facilitator), you will choose one of the following 4 themes, prepare a resource around the topic on TedEd, and then facilitate a webinar (online seminar) on the topic.
-
Blended pedagogies
-
Online assessment
-
OER-OEP
-
Academic online identity
The resource on the topic must be ready at least on the Monday before the webinar on the Friday so that everyone can prepare for the webinar discussion.
The resource must contain a video (can be a screencast or link to an excellent online video etc) and be built on the TedEd platform with some Think, Dig Deeper, Discuss elements (think about the example of the pre-course task).
During the Webinar, the topic is then discussed by all course participants through facilitation by the two topic leaders.
For the assessment of the webinar the following rubrics will be used.
2.1 Online Participation (in the webinars - everyone) - 10%
No activity
Somewhat competent
Competent
Highly competent
Score
Questions and comments (audio/text-based)
No questions or comments made (0)
Questions and comments are mainly for clarification only (1-2)
Questions and comments are reflective (3-5)
Questions and comments are though-provoking (6-8)
/8
Attendance
Did not attend at all (0)
Attended less than half of the webinar (1)
Attended the full webinar (2)
/2
Total
/10
2.2 Online Facilitation (the two-three facilitators per topic webinar) - 10%
No or little evidence
Somewhat competent
Competent
Highly competent
Score
Setting the scene
No evidence of setting the scene to audience (0)
Topic is introduced in a based and/or superficial way (1)
Topic is introduced in a relevant and appropriate way (2)
Provocative and interesting manner of introducing the topic (3)
/3
Summary of session
Did not provide a summary of the session(0)
Artificial and basic summary of session is provided (1)
Session is coherently summarised (2)
Session summary provides opportunity for further growth and/or investigation (3)
/3
Online facilitation skills
Superficial and basic engagement (1)
Majority of issues addressed during the session (2)
Facilitation skills paves the way for further knowledge development of participants (3)
Succinct and highly responsive skills demonstrated as facilitator (4)
/4
Total
/10
2.3 Online Resource (created on TedEd) - 20%
1
2
3
4
5
Content
Superficial
Basic
Satisfactory
Up to date
Deep engagement
Design (title, structure, layout, credits, visual concept)
Elements are missing, no visual concepts
Most elements missing, no visual concept
Some elements missing, some visual concept
Most elements present and visual concept
All elements present and clear visual concept
Quality
We can hear we can see
We can hear and see
We can hear, we can see and pacing is right
We can hear, we can see, pacing is right and there is personalisation but no references
We can hear, we can see, pacing is right and there is personalisation and there are references
Value/repurposing
No sense of repurposing
Webinar ready
Sense of repurposing but needs work done
Course ready
OER ready
Blended pedagogies
Online assessment
OER-OEP
Academic online identity
No activity
|
Somewhat competent
|
Competent
|
Highly competent
|
Score
| |
Questions and comments (audio/text-based)
|
No questions or comments made (0)
|
Questions and comments are mainly for clarification only (1-2)
|
Questions and comments are reflective (3-5)
|
Questions and comments are though-provoking (6-8)
|
/8
|
Attendance
|
Did not attend at all (0)
|
Attended less than half of the webinar (1)
|
Attended the full webinar (2)
|
/2
| |
Total
|
/10
|
No or little evidence
|
Somewhat competent
|
Competent
|
Highly competent
|
Score
| |
Setting the scene
|
No evidence of setting the scene to audience (0)
|
Topic is introduced in a based and/or superficial way (1)
|
Topic is introduced in a relevant and appropriate way (2)
|
Provocative and interesting manner of introducing the topic (3)
|
/3
|
Summary of session
|
Did not provide a summary of the session(0)
|
Artificial and basic summary of session is provided (1)
|
Session is coherently summarised (2)
|
Session summary provides opportunity for further growth and/or investigation (3)
|
/3
|
Online facilitation skills
|
Superficial and basic engagement (1)
|
Majority of issues addressed during the session (2)
|
Facilitation skills paves the way for further knowledge development of participants (3)
|
Succinct and highly responsive skills demonstrated as facilitator (4)
|
/4
|
Total
|
/10
| ||||
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
| |
Content
|
Superficial
|
Basic
|
Satisfactory
|
Up to date
|
Deep engagement
|
Design (title, structure, layout, credits, visual concept)
|
Elements are missing, no visual concepts
|
Most elements missing, no visual concept
|
Some elements missing, some visual concept
|
Most elements present and visual concept
|
All elements present and clear visual concept
|
Quality
|
We can hear we can see
|
We can hear and see
|
We can hear, we can see and pacing is right
|
We can hear, we can see, pacing is right and there is personalisation but no references
|
We can hear, we can see, pacing is right and there is personalisation and there are references
|
Value/repurposing
|
No sense of repurposing
|
Webinar ready
|
Sense of repurposing but needs work done
|
Course ready
|
OER ready
|
3. Individual Assignment - Written academic piece for online consumption with interview video - 50%
Apart from the specific webinar topics, you also have to write an online academic piece of 3000 words on a topic of your choice. The idea is that your academic piece will be published on a public facing blog and the audience you need to keep in mind will be Higher Education teachers.
-
It could be a theoretical piece, or about a specific technology you integrated into your teaching. It could be a case study, course redesign, or opinion piece.
-
It needs to be a polished product that can be of use to HE practitioners (in SA).
-
As you develop your written piece, you will need to think of interview questions about your piece that you have now become an expert in.
-
At the face-to-face workshop in October you will then be interviewed and the interview will be filmed. This expert interview video will then become part of your academic piece.
The first final draft (and expert interview questions for the video) need to be ready when you come for the 30 October workshop. The final product needs to be done by Sunday night 5 November 2017.
For the assessment of the written piece and the interview videos the following rubrics will be used.
3.1 Interview content - 10%
Not yet competent (0)
Competent (1)
Highly competent (2)
Score
Raising interest in your topic
Interview fails to raise any interest
Interview does raise interest
Interview is very successful in raising interest
/2
Promoting yourself
Fails to promote yourself
Does promote yourself
Does a highly effective job of promoting yourself
/2
Technical
Pacing and tempo totally detracts
Good pacing and tempo
Excellent pacing and tempo
/2
Quality of questions
Questions are wholly irrelevant to the topic
Questions are relevant to the topic
Questions are very relevant to the topic and add a deeper layer of meaning to the understanding of the topic
/2
Quality of responses to questions
Responses are wholly irrelevant to the questions asked
Responses are relevant and meaningfully answer the questions
Responses are excellent and creates a deeper engagement with the topic
/2
Total
/10
3.2 Academic piece - 40%
Not yet competent
0-49
Somewhat competent
50-59
Competent
60-69
Accomplished
70-74
Highly Accomplished
75+
Score
Engagement with literature
/theory
No evidence of engagement or irrelevant
Some evidence engagement but not sufficient or not very pertinent to project
Theory and literature is engaged with and well incorporated
Theory and literature is engaged with and incorporated
very well
Outstanding engagement and incorporation of theory and literature
/ 10
Content
Content does not pertain to the task or is irrelevant or errors in portrayal of chosen topic
Adequate coverage of topic covered but some aspects unclear
Includes essential aspects of the topic chosen
In depth coverage of topic with pertinent and up-to-date information clearly and compellingly portrayed
Outstanding coverage of chosen topic with examples provided and excellent attention to detail and deep engagement
/ 20
Academic conventions
Many obtrusive errors including referencing and citation
Several errors apparent in references, citation and presentation
Few errors unobtrusive errors in references, citation and presentation
Very well represented and near perfect references, citation etc
Outstanding error-free presentation and technical aspects
/ 5
Style/audience engagement
Wrong register for audience
Some evidence but not sufficient or not consistent
Awareness of audience is evident
Strong audience engagement throughout document
Outstanding engagement with given audience in mind
/ 5
Total
/40
It could be a theoretical piece, or about a specific technology you integrated into your teaching. It could be a case study, course redesign, or opinion piece.
It needs to be a polished product that can be of use to HE practitioners (in SA).
As you develop your written piece, you will need to think of interview questions about your piece that you have now become an expert in.
At the face-to-face workshop in October you will then be interviewed and the interview will be filmed. This expert interview video will then become part of your academic piece.
The first final draft (and expert interview questions for the video) need to be ready when you come for the 30 October workshop. The final product needs to be done by Sunday night 5 November 2017.
Not yet competent (0)
|
Competent (1)
|
Highly competent (2)
|
Score
| |
Raising interest in your topic
|
Interview fails to raise any interest
|
Interview does raise interest
|
Interview is very successful in raising interest
|
/2
|
Promoting yourself
|
Fails to promote yourself
|
Does promote yourself
|
Does a highly effective job of promoting yourself
|
/2
|
Technical
|
Pacing and tempo totally detracts
|
Good pacing and tempo
|
Excellent pacing and tempo
|
/2
|
Quality of questions
|
Questions are wholly irrelevant to the topic
|
Questions are relevant to the topic
|
Questions are very relevant to the topic and add a deeper layer of meaning to the understanding of the topic
|
/2
|
Quality of responses to questions
|
Responses are wholly irrelevant to the questions asked
|
Responses are relevant and meaningfully answer the questions
|
Responses are excellent and creates a deeper engagement with the topic
|
/2
|
Total
|
/10
|
Not yet competent
0-49
|
Somewhat competent
50-59
|
Competent
60-69
|
Accomplished
70-74
|
Highly Accomplished
75+
|
Score
| |
Engagement with literature
/theory
|
No evidence of engagement or irrelevant
|
Some evidence engagement but not sufficient or not very pertinent to project
|
Theory and literature is engaged with and well incorporated
|
Theory and literature is engaged with and incorporated
very well
|
Outstanding engagement and incorporation of theory and literature
|
/ 10
|
Content
|
Content does not pertain to the task or is irrelevant or errors in portrayal of chosen topic
|
Adequate coverage of topic covered but some aspects unclear
|
Includes essential aspects of the topic chosen
|
In depth coverage of topic with pertinent and up-to-date information clearly and compellingly portrayed
|
Outstanding coverage of chosen topic with examples provided and excellent attention to detail and deep engagement
|
/ 20
|
Academic conventions
|
Many obtrusive errors including referencing and citation
|
Several errors apparent in references, citation and presentation
|
Few errors unobtrusive errors in references, citation and presentation
|
Very well represented and near perfect references, citation etc
|
Outstanding error-free presentation and technical aspects
|
/ 5
|
Style/audience engagement
|
Wrong register for audience
|
Some evidence but not sufficient or not consistent
|
Awareness of audience is evident
|
Strong audience engagement throughout document
|
Outstanding engagement with given audience in mind
|
/ 5
|
Total
|
/40
|
No comments:
Post a Comment